Trump Weighs ‘Red Flag’ Orders to Take Guns Away Quickly

[LAGC]

The White House is considering the idea of using restraining orders to take firearms away from people considered dangerous as part of its response to last week’s massacre at a Florida high school, two people familiar with the matter said.

Under extreme risk protection orders, which are also known as red flag laws or gun violence restraining orders, firearms can be confiscated from people found to be at risk.

The White House is studying an Indiana version of the law, and is considering other measures as well, according to the people, who requested anonymity to discuss policy deliberations. Four other states also have such laws.

At the White House on Thursday, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi described to President Donald Trump similar efforts underway in her state to allow law enforcement to seize firearms from someone who is deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...curb-shootings

[l921428x]

I have talked of this before. This is where this gets really dangerous.

PM me your address so I can turn you in.

[LAGC]

I agree, this is kind of worrisome.

I know we all like to point out how so many of these killers exhibit "warning signs" and "red flags"... and wouldn't it be nice to stop them before they act?

But it's one thing to lock the PERSON up in a secure mental hospital if they are truly unhinged, but just taking away people's guns without due process is rather shaky territory.

Of course, we can TRUST that the police would only do so against "clear and present dangers"... but how long before every estranged ex-wife is reporting on their ex-husband, or sons and daughters reporting their parents because they are getting too "old" or "senile", or a neurotic family member reporting a relative for having "anger control issues" ???

"Slippery slope" is an understatement here...

[NAPOTS]

Don't forget about due process lagc

[LAGC]

Don't forget about due process lagc

I'm a big believer in due process, believe me.

That's why I'd be very interested to hear what the particulars are, what exact criteria would allow police to seize someone's guns in this fashion?

Also, in the case where someone IS deemed a "danger" -- what process is there to challenge such a finding? How can someone prove they are "rehabilitated" for the purposes of these police actions, so they can go about getting their guns back? Or are they permanently stripped of their RTKABA?

So many questions here...

[alismith]

Could this report be fake news?

I'm getting so I don't trust ANY news agency and would prefer to wait until things play out to take them seriously.

I know there's a danger with this attitude, but Fake News is so rampant that it's hard to trust any source.

[jet3534]

Many of us here have been through a divorce or two. If you have not, be advised that with the current family law and legal climate things get ugly, very ugly -- particularly in cases involving child custody. If you own guns you will be reported as a potential killer, if you have children you are a child abuser, and so forth. Anyone who owns guns and wants to keep them should think long and hard about maintaining a marital status of single. Just sayin...